Wednesday, 13 November 2013

On Joss Whedon, White Feminism And Intersectionality Failures


Joss Whedon gave a speech the other day and had some things to say about feminism. A lot of it was problematic, but I won't go into it here because it's already been said, and the fact that he said it is only vaugely related to the point I want to make.

See, Joss Whedon is free to say whatever he likes about feminism in a "freedom of speech" kind of way. That is his right. But the arrogance of suggesting that a movement centered on women and their efforts to advance their own causes should refocus itself based on the self-serving suggestion of a cishet white guy is, well.... astronomical.

But truthfully, the bigger issue here is not what he said, but the reaction to what he said. While I don't agree with the nitty gritty of his reasoning, there are legitimate complaints to be made about the word feminist, and the feminist movement. Women of Colour, and black women specifically, created womanism for this very reason; to address the issues that were unique to their intersectional experience as women who were also not white. WoC have been pointing out the problems inherent in feminism for YEARS, and have been summarily ignored. And yet, a cishet white guy tangentially brings up those issues and suddenly it's revolutionary information. Suddenly we should be praising a white male ally for his perfect feminism for parroting what WoC have been saying forever. It's bullshit that contributes to the erasure of WoC from the feminist movement and privileges someone with literally ALL THE PRIVILEGES over the women who the movement was actually meant to benefit.

This attitude is significant because Joss Whedon's speech wasn't just covered, it was covered extensively and lauded as a revolutionary act. It was presented as an intellectual achievement worthy of praise, when almost the exact sentiments have long been championed by WoC to no avail. For a day and half, the white feminist movement hung its hat on the glorification of a white guy who assigned himself the feminist ally label. I don't mean to be a Debbie Downer, but as I recall, things didn't turn out so well the last time that happened.


In contrast, within a few days, legendary womanist thinker bell hooks sat down with fellow womanist Melissa Harris Perry to discuss feminism in the context of black women, and the current state of our politics. It was an amazing moment for black women that produced some genuine wisdom about how black women can and do move through the world, and how society's expectations affect our ability to do so. It was discussed extensively on twitter for days; it was an important moment for womanism. And yet... this was the sum total of coverage that it received on Jezebel, one of the most visible mainstream feminist sites. But the problem wasn't just Jezebel. (Especially considering that it is notorious for completely failing on intersectional issues.) The real problem is that not a single other mainstream feminist site stepped in to fill the holes in coverage.

This speaks to the larger issue of white feminism focusing not on dismantling the patriarchy to the benefit of all women, but rather in white women gaining access to the patriarchy (and parity with white men) on the strength of their white privilege. It solidifies for me, my belief that white feminism is self-serving, and is intentionally non-intersectional. As Flavia Dzodan says on Red Light Politics:
There is a direct correlation between the lack of coverage of bell hooks and Melissa Harris-Perry’s conversation and the amplification (and staunch defense) of Joss Whedon. Both exist within the same historical wrongs of white feminism. Both are part of the same neoliberal ethos that has taken over mainstream feminism. Two Black women intellectuals challenging a racist, capitalist patriarchy are not to be looked upon as role models. The key to understand this is their Blackness. This neoliberal feminism seeks empowerment by encouraging women to be more like white men. For this media, Whedon is a feminist icon; bell hooks and Melissa Harris Perry barely register in the radar.
To me, this also connects to the larger issue of the visibility of WoC within the feminist movement. Not only is a white man's opinion being elevated over the opinions of WoC, but when undeniable activism happens outside the context of white feminism, it is largely ignored.

This is significant because it ties into the idea that WoC aren't doing work for their own empowerment. When major womanist conferences occur and there is no mainstream coverage, it feeds into the idea that the work simply doesn't exist. In essence, down the line, when WW "demand receipts" for the work that WoC are doing, none exist. The only coverage to be found is on smaller, non-mainstream blogs that have significantly lower, niche readerships, and this fact is used as justification that the events being covered weren't "important enough"; completely ignoring the fact that their white privilege gives them access to resources that are often unavailable to WoC. In essence it is a silencing tactic that serves to erase WoC from the conversation altogether. For Joss Whedon's butchered attempt to present womanist arguments to be signal boosted over actual WoC is a travesty.

I happened to have a great conversation with both Flavia Dzodan and Lisa Elwood on twitter that inspired this post, and I've storyfied the tweets below. The lesson I learned from engaging with them is that this attitude isn't just a one-off thing. White feminism is invested in ignoring women of colour and negating their presence and contributions to the feminist movement, and it's frustrating and infuriating, and it bring it right back around to why WoC have issues identifying with the feminist label in the first place. There is no genuine effort to incorporate intersectional thinking or perspectives.



6 comments:

  1. So, uh...was that the first time Melissa Harris-Perry and bell hooks have sat down for a talk in public? Because I got the impression they were friends and maybe it happened on occasion when they both had time. I mean, there was a lot of value in both of them together, particularly where they disagreed, which was only on the movies, but they fleshed each other's thoughts out too. So, point me to more please? About Joss Whedon...yeah, the reaction to him wasn't unexpected, as I was in the Buffy fandom back in the day when he was pronounced God of Feminists and it read more like "We need a (white) dude to guide us and we have one, yay!" If you connect the dots many of the same people are Jez commenters. Honestly I watched both videos in the same day and if other white chicks like me did that, they wouldn't have given the same weight to his as to the Black Womens Voices talk, because bell hooks sort of spells it out about dismantling the patriarchy as the goal. Not this "If you believe in equality your'e a feminist, you slacker!" bullshit that's always touted on Jez, because while that should be the result, it's not enough for a main goal. I'm rambling, but I've been on Jez and critical of it for years and it never became so clear to me what the problem was. I'm not sure if it would click for everyone the same though, so yay for people repeating it over and over. Also another thing about the Black Voices chat, I got a lot out of it, and I would say the Q&A would be soo enlightening, but I'm not sure if Jez and ilk could report on it and analyze what went on, like with the dude, without appropriating it. But a transcript would be good. I just wouldn't want to see them y'know, make it about them. And so my question to you is: WW expect WOC to identify and relate to white women feminists and all their trials and tribulations that go with that, but say, if we were to look at instances from WOC and learn from it, I feel there is...well, like I said I think some WW would completely appropriate the experience and make it their own ("that happened to me blah blah blah") but OTOH I also sometimes get a vibe of "look but don't touch" from WOC. I think it's absolutely crazy that the unspoken rule is that we have to relate to other feminists on a personal level therefore anecdotes rule all, but I think even bell hooks would tell me I'm being a bit harsh there, and it doesn't matter what I think, it is what it is. So guidance might be helpful, and really the only one on Jez who should report on it would be Dodai, I think. But then that's pressure on her I think you might relate to. I'm seeing a minefield, is what I'm saying. How to navigate?

    ReplyDelete
  2. They could have Meagan Hatcher-Mays write it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Is she a regular contributor now? I guess I should read Jez more, haha. Even so, completely leaving out subjective impressions of each writer, the white ladies don't fuck with Dodai (mostly) by virtue of her seniority. They kind of just comment with "Whuh, I don't get it." Whereas they do fuck with Meagan Hatcher-Mays.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Meagan and Lindy are pretty tight, so even though she's not regular, I doubt it would be hard to ask her to write something up.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Who's asking? (Finally, not having a twitter is paying off for me!)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Intersectionality is the unintended intellectual Trojan Horse-the Ouroborus of Oppression Olympics Victimology. Misgogyny/Misandry are two sides of the Patriarchal coin. Heads we lose, tails we lose. White Male Privilege/Guilt? LOL! Anyone credible checking my present life timeline and for a few centuries back would dismiss totalising the experience of my ancestors as that of 'white male privilege' when some of them died in a Famine. To echo MJ: "I'm not going to spend my life being a gender/racia/humancentric sterotype, and I'm not going to let anyone else totalise or disempower me through that oblique strategy either" Fight the real enemy: Carnism and Speciesism

    ReplyDelete

Add your brilliance!

Disqus for BattyMamzelle